Candidate Dexx Williams fails his own job interview with cynical suggestion about city politicians …

This just in, a press release from police officer Dexx Williams, who is running for city council in Edmonton’s city centre Ward Six:

“Ward 6 candidate says Polygraph Test Could Increase Accountability. In recent months, there has been no shortage of scandal linked to elected officials, from alleged illegal drug use, theft of public money, along with grandiose promises and claims. Police officers go through a psychological exam, background check, and a polygraph test within the application process. It’s par for the course as they’re held to a higher standard than the general public they serve.

“Ward 6 candidate Dexx Williams knows this process first hand and says it’s time that politicians should be held to the same standard. ‘As a police officer, I have helped victims of con-artists, scammed out of their money. Some residents I’ve spoken to feel that politicians are no better,’ Williams said. ‘Imagine if mayoral forums involved a lie detector, how much more truthful would they be?'”

My take?

This may be news to Mr. Williams, but politicians already do go through a harsh screening process before they’re allowed to hold any kind of power. It’s called an election. In an election, the public will check out your background, opponents will try to find dirt on you, and all parties will test your experience and ideas to see if you’re up for elected office or not quite ready for prime time.

Elections aren’t always sufficient to weed out liars and incompetents, but the democratic process has worked to build a great society and it’s so far accomplished this without administering the polygraph to candidates. It’s also worth nothing that while police candidates may be polygraphed and psychologically tested, there are plenty of examples of police officers later grossly abusing their power. Those stern measures that are part of the hiring practice for police officers may or may not go some good, but they are hardly foolproof when it comes to weeding out the unfit.

I have a few other questions about Williams’ proposal.

Who would administer the test? Some unbiased third party? Maybe city manager Simon Farbrother? Should council hire its own polygraph specialist? Maybe he can dress up like a public executioner.

Or, just maybe, political opponents should administer the test?

Who will tell if a candidate passes, fails or is found inconclusive? Will it be up to, say, mayoral candidate Don Iveson to say if Kerry Diotte has passed, or Diotte to say if Iveson has passed?

Can the subject of the test be asked only about political issues? What about their finances? Their love life? Have they ever had impure thoughts? Ever inhaled? Picked their nose and ate it?

Will the results be made public, or will they be kept private, as they are kept utterly confidential when the police administer these tests to recruits? If they are kept private, what good are these tests in informing the public of a bad apple? Would not the whole process be a massive waste of time and money? Or, if you fail and are deemed unfit but the exact reasons for your failure are left private, does the bad apple just have to skulk off quietly, leaving under the great cloud of having failed the test for some unknown reason?

Will an invasive practice like polygraphing candidates be seen as such an indignity and infringement on personal liberty that honest candidates with a healthy measure of self-respect simply refuse to run?

Is Williams serious here or is he just trying to make a point about some politicians being liars? If he’s not serious and is just grandstanding to make a point, it’s an awfully cynical attack on our local politicians. No one on Edmonton city council, at least not in recent decades, has been found to be a con artist or a scammer. There has been no alleged drug use or theft of public money here. As for grandiose promises and claims, well, this is politics, and if can’t tell what stinks from what makes sense based on your experience and judgement, you shouldn’t be in the fierce and messy business of city building.

So I am against this idea of polygraphing candidates. For the record, I’m also against administering truth serum and/or water boarding candidates. Phrenology is also out.

P.S. After I posted this and tweeted on the issue, Williams responded: “Just an idea for discussion. Would never expect it to happen. Qs would be on platform issues / responses.”

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the “X” in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.